Update listing price

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the PATCH mechanism but does not disclose side effects, error conditions, required permissions, reversibility, or what happens if the SKU doesn't exist. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action and its convenience aspect. No wasted words, though the term 'purchasable_offer' may be jargon but is still precise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description does not cover success/failure outcomes, prerequisites, or error handling, leaving an agent without critical information needed to invoke it correctly and interpret results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the description adds little beyond what the schema already states (selling price, optional MRP). It does not provide additional context on units, validation rules, or interaction between price and mrp, so it meets the baseline without enriching semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool sets the selling price (and optional MRP) for a SKU via a purchasable_offer PATCH, and distinguishes it from a full upsert. This is specific and immediately differentiates it from upsert_listing, making the purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'without a full upsert' implies this is the tool to use when only updating price, contrasting with upsert_listing. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like set_quantity or state when not to use it, though the context is reasonably clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.